Religion or Science - How do they compare?

Why? Specifics Phat. What have I called a lie (and I do limit the term "lie" to specific instances) as opposed to falsehoods or misrepresentations that was not an out and out lie?Read what I write Phat. I try not to use terms like lie loosely.And should the apologists come here and post I will respond to them just as I would to any poster.

Let's take Faith and me. Granted, I know you through what you write better than she does because I take a lot of time to read what you write. Earlier in this thread, you told her to stop lying. Do you not think that she honestly believes what she writes about?
Earlier, you said to her The only real way that she would be lying is if she, in fact, lies to herself knowingly. Also, assuming first that you are correct about the sources...which would be hard to prove...she would also have to willingly quote sources that she subconsciously recognized as lying.The same applies to me. I trust some of what people here present as facts. Theodoric seems to like Richard Carrier. I honestly believe in a spiritual war, and I honestly think Richard Carrier is one of satans agents...I disagree with a lot of what he claims about the Bible. To be honest, I have not read his works nearly as thoroughly as I do your posts, and I think it is either because I don't want to entertain the distant possibility that the content may be factual or that I fear that I am diluting my faith by absorbing such propaganda by spiritual forces of the enemy. I think that Faith feels even stronger than I do concerning this stuff-- the difference being that she does not even read what her opponents (as she perceives them) post---whereas I do. I think if distant memory serves me correctly, that I was told to stop lying...if I find it in the archives I will reread it in context, for I (think) that I know my intentions in anything that I write. Perhaps at times, I write only to win arguments, truth be damned. The issue is whether I willfully lie in order to win an argument. I do not believe that I do. I cannot speak for Faith.

What she believes is irrelevant to whether or not she is lying. If it is false, and she has been shown it is false, and she continues to repeat it, she is lying.The easiest person to lie to is oneself.That is important.The easiest person to lie to is oneself.Lots of things can be simply a matter of opinion, but most things can be supported by evidence. My membership in a recognized Chapter of Club Christian can be supported by fact. The Episcopal Church has a registry of every member (most of the major denominations as well) and you are entered into the communion. If you change churches, that membership gets transferred from the old to the new Parish. The system exists and has existed now for many centuries.If Faith would say, "I don't believe you are a Christian" then I'd just laugh at her. If Faith says "You are not a Christian" then she is lying.

Was liar the worst epithet thrown around here? Weren't folks being called Nazis? What was in that message you removed in that response to me?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

That, of course, is nonsense. If it was true, the USS Enterprise would be parked in orbit above your house and Frodo would be knocking on your door asking for directions to Mordor. What I said was, "If I have a need for a time machine, does that mean I have access to one or that one even exists?" My question was not about the theoretical possibility of time travel. It was about whether or not I can get a time machine at Wal-mart.The same applies to your "need" to believe. The need may be real but that doesn't mean the belief is.

Napoleon tried to crown himself. I could declare that I am a Christian, and prove that the evidence existed that supported my membership. The counter-argument centers around the definitions of reality, evidence, belief, and supportable vs unsupportable assertions.Critics (whom would be hypothetical members of Biblical Christianity) live in an alternate universe from the one that you and many of the critically thinking science minded do. And before I go on, I realize that I cant win this argument.All I am saying is that if a man says that he sees a giant rabbit that lives with him, he can be labeled delusional yet cannot be charged with lying simply because the evidence does not support giant rabbits. The evidence is never conclusive when a spiritual war is being fought. Critics would label you as unchristian because you attack the sacred cow of Christian History, which threatens them. You attack the divinity of Jesus Christ which is sacrilegious to them. You strip away the certainty of faith and even suggest to people that they throw the whole idea of God that they have been taught away.Then, to add insult to injury, you tell them that they are lying, which is not taken lightly when they see themselves as merely a YEC presenting an alternate explanation for how reality played out. Thats all I'm saying.add by edit: Perhaps I lied in this very argument. I can hear you now, telling me to stop misrepresenting what you say! Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

If Tolkien were alive today and knew of me and my house, I could well be written into the story that he imagined. Frodo and i would get along just nifty, but Harvey the white rabbit may get jealous! as for the Enterprise, I see your logic. Only a Creator of all seen and unseen could author a story where natural laws were suspended and things were created ex nihilio. I doubt He would create another enterprise, however....one is too many.

Again, I do not (or at least try very hard to not) ever do that.When I use the term lying I mean instances where there is positive evidence that the person is lying and the person has been told about that evidence. There is no evidence of any such thing as a Spiritual War and I do not think I have ever said someone was lying for making such a silly claim. But it is a silly claim until and unless it can be supported by reason, logic or reality. Nor have I ever attacked the divinity of Jesus. Phat, when you say that are you not exhibiting the very example of lying both to yourself and to all the readers of this board?

yeah, note my add by edit above.

It's the "...merely a YEC" part that throws a bit of a monkey wrench into the whole attempt to spare individual feelings. Declaring oneself a YEC carries with it specific, testable claims about the physical world. Adherents also make implicit and explicit claims regarding the intellectual honesty of the scientific community.The time has long passed when it can be pretended that those claims can be reconciled with reality. When you make an explicit claim that contradicts the findings of a particular scientific field, and when those claims have been debunked repeatably, ignorance is no longer an excuse. Unless YECs wish to assume the cloak of stupidity or intellectual dysfunction, they are lying. They deserve better than the bigotry of low expectations. Generations of individuals have been facilitated in the their dysfunction by misdirected politeness.

The vast majority of people on this forum including most of us theists agree that we have evolved. However, this forum is called evolution vs creationism. If we want to say that creationists aren’t allowed to post their views because they’ve been proven wrong then just maybe the name of the forum should be changed. Calling someone a liar because they express their firmly held views, whether they are right or wrong, is just plain rude and IMHO doesn’t have a place on this forum.

Yet I imagine that telling scientists that their perceptions have been misdirected by an evil, invisible, magic space lizard is just what? Witnessing?

If they express them as views or beliefs rather than facts then it's unlikely anyone would say they are lying.If Faith said "I don't believe Roman Catholics are Christians."; then she is just showing her utter ignorance.If faith says "Roman Catholics are not Christians."; then she is lying.

Like I said, just plain rude. You make my point perfectly.

C'mon jar, everyone knows that she is simply stating her beliefs.Edited by GDR, : missed a word as you can see in jar's quote